Direct to implant breast reconstruction by using SERI, preliminary report

Roy De Vita, Ernesto Maria Buccheri, Marcello Pozzi, Giovanni Zoccali, Roy De Vita, Ernesto Maria Buccheri, Marcello Pozzi, Giovanni Zoccali

Abstract

Background: There has been a "rising tide" in mastectomy utilization that can be attributed to more skin-sparing mastectomies (SSMs) performed concurrently with immediate breast reconstruction. We report our experience of the first use of SERI Surgical Scaffold (SERI; Allergan, Inc.) in 21 cases of direct to implant (DTI) breast reconstruction after SSM.

Methods: Our retrospective experience, from April 2013 to May 2014, is based on 21 cases of direct to implant (DTI) breast reconstruction after SSM (9 monolateral 6 bilateral). All the patients were oncological with a preoperative cancer stage was into 0-2 stage. In order to assess the level of satisfaction with the aesthetical result, on 4-13 months post-operative patients were asked to complete a questionnaire that evaluated various parameters by means of a Visual Analogue Scale (V.A.S.).

Results: Over a 13-months period, a total of 15 patients underwent 21 immediate breast reconstructive procedures with Allergan Natrelle 410 style implants plus SERI after SSMs. Definitive histological examination give evidence of 5 patients intraductal carcinoma, 6 patients multifocal carcinoma and 4 patients carcinoma in situ. 6 bilateral cases of direct to implant (DTI) breast reconstruction after SSM had a monolateral oncological treatment and on the other side a prophylactic treatment. At the end of the short follow up (minimum 6 months) all the patient were cancer free with an excellent outcome. Complication rate presents just one implant exposure followed by a revised surgery. At V.A.S. the mean patient satisfaction was 5,77 (good), 4,09 (fair) for sensitivity of the nipple areola complex, 6,33 (good) assessment of implant position, 6,28 (good) self esteem, 5,2 (good) attraction ability, 4,99 (fair) intimate life, 6,81 (good) overall feelings about breast reconstruction, 6,71 (good) simmetry.

Conclusions: The really encouraging results of our early experience will help surgeons introducing SERI into their practice to select appropriate patients for direct-to-implant single-stage immediate breast reconstruction. A larger study cohort and longer follow-up times are required to identify additional predictors and indications.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Case 1. A: 39 YO nulliparous, preoperative view, grade 1 intraductal carcinoma on the right breast. B: Right breast: therapeutic nipple skin sparing mastectomy direct to implant Allergan 410 Style FF 425 and SERI®. 3 weeks postop. C: 5 months postop.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Case 2. A: 45 YO, preoperative view, previous quadrantectomy without Radiotherapy on the right breast, grade 1 multifocal carcinoma on the left breast. B: Left breast: therapeutic nipple skin sparing mastectomy direct to implant Allergan 410 Style MF 420 and SERI®. 2 weeks postop. Right breast: prophylactic nipple skin sparing mastectomy direct to implant Allergan 410 Style MF 420 and SERI®. 2 weeks postop. C: 4 months postop.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Case 3. A: 51 YO, preoperative view, previous biopsy grade 2 intraductal carcinoma on the left breast. B: Therapeutic nipple skin sparing mastectomy direct to implant Allergan 410 Style MF 375 and SERI®. 3 weeks postop, initial skin suffering. C: 2 months postop implant and SERI® exposure before reoperation. D: 7 months postop after implant explantation and Latissimus dorsi miocutaneous flap as a salvage procedure with Allergan 410 MF 335.

References

    1. Balch CM, Jacobs LK. Mastectomies on the rise for breast cancer: “the tide is changing”. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2669–2672. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0634-y.
    1. Arrington AK, Jarosek SL, Virnig BA, Habermann EB, Tuttle TM. Patient and surgeon characteristics associated with increased use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2697–2704. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0641-z.
    1. Jones NB, Wilson J, Kotur L, Stephens J, Farrar WB, Agnese DM. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer: an increasing trend at a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2691–2696. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0547-9.
    1. McGuire KP, Santillan AA, Kaur P, Meade T, Parbhoo J, Mathias M, Shamehdi C, Davis M, Ramos D, Cox CE. Are mastectomies on the rise? A 13-year trend analysis of the selection of mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy in 5865 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2682–2690. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0635-x.
    1. Noone RB, Frazier TG, Noone GC, Blanchet NP, Murphy JB, Rose D. Recurrence of breast carcinoma following immediate reconstruction: a 13-year review. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1994;93:96–9106. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199401000-00014.
    1. Singletary SE. Skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: The M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 1996;3:411–416. doi: 10.1007/BF02305673.
    1. Eberlein TJ, Crespo LD, Smith BL, Hergrueter CA, Douville L, Eriksson E. Prospective evaluation of immediate reconstruction after mastectomy. Ann Surg. 1993;218:29–36. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199307000-00006.
    1. Johnson CH, van Heerden JA, Donohue JH, Martin JK, Jackson IT, Ilstrup DM. Oncological aspects of immediate breast reconstruction following mastectomy for malignancy. Arch Surg. 1989;124:819–823. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1989.01410070073015.
    1. Huang CJ, Hou MF, Lin SD, Chuang HY, Huang MY, Fu OY, Lian SL. Comparison of local recurrence and distant metastases between breast cancer patients after postmastectomy radiotherapy with and without immediate TRAM flap reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118:1079–1086. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000220527.35442.44.
    1. Platt J, Baxter N, Zhong T. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer. CMAJ. 2011;183:2109–2116. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.110513.
    1. Atisha D, Alderman AK, Lowery JC, Kuhn LE, Davis J, Wilkins EG. Prospective analysis of long-term psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: two-year postoperative results from the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcomes Study. Ann Surg. 2008;247:1019–1028. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181728a5c.
    1. Wilkins EG, Cederna PS, Lowery JC, Davis JA, Kim HM, Roth RS, Goldfarb S, Izenberg PH, Houin HP, Shaheen KW. Prospective analysis of psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: one-year postoperative results from the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;106:1014–1025. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200010000-00010.
    1. Morrow M, Bucci C, Rademaker A. Medical contraindications are not a major factor in the underutilization of breast conserving therapy. J Am Coll Surg. 1998;186:269–274. doi: 10.1016/S1072-7515(97)00153-1.
    1. Salzberg CA, Dunavant C, Nocera N. Immediate breast reconstruction using porcine acellular dermal matrix (Strattice™): long-term outcomes and complications. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2013;66:323–328. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2012.10.015.
    1. Sood S, Elder E, French J: Nipple-sparing mastectomy with implant reconstruction: the Westmead experience.ANZ J Surg 2014, 29: in press.
    1. Bayram Y, Kulahci Y, Irgil C. Skin-reducing subcutaneous mastectomy using a dermal barrier flap and immediate breast reconstruction with an implant: a new surgical design for reconstruction of early-stage breast cancer. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2010;34:71–77. doi: 10.1007/s00266-009-9452-7.
    1. Scuderi N, Dessy LA, Buccheri EM, Marchetti F, Mazzocchi M, Chiummariello S, Klinger F, Onesti MG, Klinger M, Alfano C. Phase 2 cross-over multicenter trial on the efficacy and safety of topical cyanoacrylates compared with topical silicone gel in the prevention of pathologic scars. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2011;35:373–381. doi: 10.1007/s00266-010-9621-8.
    1. Zagouri F, Chrysikos DT, Sergentanis TN, Giannakopoulou G, Zografos CG, Papadimitriou CA, Zografos GC. Prophylactic mastectomy: an appraisal. Am Surg. 2013;79:205–212.
    1. Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon’s 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: Part I. A prospective analysis of early complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118:825–831. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000232362.82402.e8.
    1. Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon’s 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: Part II. An analysis of long-term complications, aesthetic outcomes, and patient satisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118:832–839. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000232397.14818.0e.
    1. Buinewicz B, Rosen B. Acellular cadaveric dermis (AlloDerm): a new alternative for abdominal hernia repair. Ann Plast Surg. 2004;52:188–194. doi: 10.1097/01.sap.0000100895.41198.27.
    1. Shorr N, Perry JD, Goldberg RA, Hoenig J, Shorr J. The safety and applications of acellular human dermal allograft in ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery: A preliminary report. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;16:223–230. doi: 10.1097/00002341-200005000-00010.
    1. Chaplin JM, Costantino PD, Wolpoe ME, Bederson JB, Griffey ES, Zhang WX. Use of acellular dermal allograft for dural replacement: an experimental study. Neurosurgery. 1999;16:196–201.
    1. Duncan DI. Correction of implant rippling using allograft dermis. Aesthet Surg J. 2001;21:81–84. doi: 10.1067/maj.2001.113438.
    1. Salzberg CA. Nonexpansive immediate breast reconstruction using human acellular tissue matrix graft (AlloDerm) Ann Plast Surg. 2006;57:1–5. doi: 10.1097/01.sap.0000214873.13102.9f.
    1. Gdalevitch P, Ho A, Genoway K, Alvrtsyan H, Bovill E, Lennox P, Van Laeken N, Macadam S. Direct-to-implant single-stage immediate breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: predictors of failure. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;6:738–747. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000171.
    1. Lee JH, Park KR, Kim TG, Ha JH, Chung KJ, Kim YH, Lee SJ, Kang SH. A comparative study of CG CryoDerm and AlloDerm in direct-to-implant immediate breast reconstruction. Arch Plast Surg. 2013;4:374–379. doi: 10.5999/aps.2013.40.4.374.
    1. USA Product Labeling and Safety Information SERI™ Surgical Scaffold. []
    1. Gamboa-Bobadilla GM. Implant breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;56:22–25. doi: 10.1097/01.sap.0000185460.31188.c1.
    1. Liu AS, Kao HK, Reish RG, Hergrueter CA, May JW, Jr, Guo L. Postoperative complications in prosthesis-based breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:1755–1762. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31820cf233.
    1. Ashikari RH, Ashikari AY, Kelemen PR, Salzberg CA. Subcutaneous mastectomy and immediate reconstruction for prevention of breast cancer for high-risk patients. Breast Cancer. 2008;15:185–191. doi: 10.1007/s12282-008-0059-7.
    1. Stump A, Holton LH, III, Connor J, Harper JR, Slezak S, Silverman RP. The use of acellular dermal matrix to prevent capsule formation around implants in a primate model. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:82–91. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ab112d.
    1. Uzunismail A, Duman A, Perk C. The effects of acellular dermal allograft (AlloDerm) interface on silicone related capsule formation: experimental study. Eur J Surg. 2008;31:170–185.
    1. Basu CB, Leong M, Hicks J. Does acellular cadaveric dermis (ACD) affect breast implant capsule formation in reconstructive breast surgery? A histopathologic comparison of breast capsule and ACD. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:1842–1847. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f44674.
    1. Jansen LA, Macadam SA. The use of AlloDerm in postmastectomy alloplastic breast reconstruction: part II. A cost analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:2245–2254. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182131c6b.
    1. Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, Medford-Davis L, Hertl C, Austen WG., Jr Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: Indications, complications, trends, and costs. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1170–1178. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318230c2f6.
    1. Roostaeian J, Pavone L, Da Lio A, Lipa J, Festekjian J, Crisera C. Immediate placement of implants in breast reconstruction: Patient selection and outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:1407–1416. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318208d0ea.
    1. Roostaeian J, Sanchez I, Vardanian A, Herrera F, Galanis C, Da Lio A, Festekjian J, Crisera CA. Comparison of immediate implant placement versus the staged tissue expander technique in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129:909–918. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824ec411.
    1. Salzberg CA, Ashikari AY, Koch RM, Chabner-Thompson E. An 8-year experience of direct-to-implant immediate breast reconstruction using human acellular dermal matrix (AlloDerm) Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:514–524. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318200a961.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit